On Jun 26, 1:19 pm, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Dan O wrote:
On Jun 26, 8:12 am, Frank
wrote:

Studies consistently show that half of car-bike crashes are the fault of
cyclists. (That doesn't count the far greater number of bike-only
crashes, almost all of which the cyclist should be able to avoid by
proper attention.)

So should the cyclists be absolved if the motorist is determined to be
at fault? Well, perhaps we shouldn't blame that victim; but another
brief paper I've seen showed that roughly 85% (IIRC) of motorist-caused
crashes would be prevented by cyclists riding as competent and legal
vehicle operators with full rights to the road - for example, riding
outside the door zone, riding out of the gutter, or maintaining a
central lane position in narrow lanes.

We live our lives doing what we have to do. For you it's a game of
constantly proving how much better you are than everyone else - using
your own selection of criteria.

Seems to me that was a smarmy thing to say. Still no mirrors in your house?


Smarmy: Oily; Gushingly or unctuously flattering.
(Unctuous: Characterized by affected, exaggerated, or insincere
earnestness.)

Education is a useful tool. Telling someone that they can be taught to
control the behavior of others is rubbish.

So are you saying that yesterday, my central lane position did _not_
prevent the driver that big pickup truck from squeezing by me? Are you
saying he actually ran me over, but I didn't notice? Get real, Duane.

Yes, it did not. It may have *encouraged* him to wait for the next
lane to be clear before changing lanes, but he (obviously) wasn't
going to mow you down in any case.

He would probably have attempted to pass had I squeezed over...

Did I suggest any sort of squeezing? And you say "probably". You
think someone who patiently and cooperatively follows until safe to
change lanes and pass would have dangerously risked sideswiping you if
it looked feasible? Earth to Frank: The sideswipe is still feasible
even if you hog the lane.

... and ridden
near the gutter. In doing so, he would have given me far less than
three feet of clearance, which many states are now making the legal (if
unenforced) minimum. By riding more toward lane center, I did prevent
him from doing that. It has to do with arithmetic, Dan. Seehttp://tinyurl.com/7xwlpkl


It's not simply math. There are many considerations. The condition
of the road, presence of curbing, storm drains, debris, etc. Traffic
density in the next lane. Often a car can partially leave the lane if
there's a traffic gap in the next lane that wouldn't allow a courteous
complete lane change. Etc. ad infinitum.

(Are you saying there *was* room
for him to pass if you'd been as far right as practicable?)

I _was_ as far right as practicable. In my state, "practicable" does
not mean "so far right as to endanger yourself by possible sideswipes."

Dude, you can be sideswiped whereever you postion yourself.

Specifically, the law says a cyclist is allowed to ride further left
if the lane is too narrow to share.


Practicable: Capable of being done, effected, or executed; feasible

So he waited a few seconds, then went around completely in the other
lane when it cleared. No problem, no hassle.


Sure, and that's how it ought to be. Doesn't demonstrate in any way,
shape, or form that he would have risked sideswiping had you not
"taken control" of the situation for both of you.

So did you want me to risk getting sideswiped to save a motorist a few
seconds? Are you really that submissive, that ready to give up
cyclists' rights to the road?


I'm not talking about offering him the lane you're in. I'm talking
about a cooperative stance. And there are situations where taking the
lane makes sense. And this may be one of them. I was just saying,
"Yes, your lane postition did not prevent him sideswiping you."

Personally, I find it hard to believe this is the only route to the
hardware store or wherever. I think you just prefer this route -
maybe in part because it's the most direct - but maybe also because
you like controlling things.

Okay, here's the criticism: Your brand of cycling education is about
indoctrination, shaming and blaming anyone who eschews your Church of
Vehicular Cycling.

Dan, I was a college professor for many years. Part of that job was to
tell students when they did things wrong, and how they could do them
correctly. I did that, and I worked very hard to give extremely
specific feedback; but there was no shaming or blaming. It's called
teaching.


"Wrong", "correctly", ("properly") - hmm... that's the attitidue we
see here that prompted my remark about an apparent compulsion to apply
your own criteria to constantly prove yourself better than everyone
else.

And re; "shaming" and "blaming" - I wasn't referring to your work in
the classroom.

I suppose there may be teachers that accept any work as good enough, or
teachers that never tell about better ways of doing things. (My
students did tell me of one prof who gave an A to anyone who attended
his class.

Did he have a canoe? ;-)

Fortunately, it was a far-less-than-essential liberal arts
class.)

And *you* and your classes were superior, of course.

Personally, I think that's irresponsible and counterproductive,
and especially so when it involves the possibility of personal injury.


Anything's possible. But yeah, safety is serious business.

So I'm sorry, but I'm not going to endorse the riding style you've
espoused - riding drunk, riding at night without lights, riding
wrong-way, zooming at random on and off sidewalks, doing stunts in
traffic and purposely angering motorists.


Did I ask for your endorsement?



You can still continue to
work for improvements to the few places where infrastructure would
really help, or improvements to laws and justice. But if you learn to
ride with real competence, things become better right now.

As mentioned inhttp://vimeo.com/43603867once you learn the simple
techniques of acting as a legitimate vehicle operator, all of a sudden,
the motorists seem to get much smarter.

Not much smarter (less confused, perhaps); but what really matters is
that they check their hostility for reasonableness.

And the "simple techniques of acting as a legitimate vehicle
operator"? Who doesn't know how to do that, and what the hell are
they doing on the road if they don't??

"Who doesn't know how to do that?" It's apparent you've never taught a
class. It's apparent you've never looked at crash data. You've never
been asked "So what side of the road are bikes supposed to ride on?"


Idiots - too many of them blithe as well. Educate away. Knock
yourself out. Good for you and those it helps. But get off my back.

I know exactly how to play
Traffic Parcheesi, but it's *so* con[s]training. I want to Ride Bike!

Right. We've heard what you want to do, and how you do it. Lots of
14-year-olds agree with you, which should tell you something.


Smarmy supercilious judgmental.

You don't have to wait for some fairy tale future, with green-painted
bike tracks whisking you everywhere you want to go.

The "fairy tale future" is your hearkening for the Pleasantville
Father Knows Best days of yore.

Dan, you're losing track of the discussion. I'm the guy who's
comfortable riding in the world of today.


.... except for those new-fangled facilities.

Pleasantville exists (I live there),
but the world at large is ever changing, and guess what - there's
going to be more (and more) bike facilities. Learn to deal with it
and ride with *real* competence.

There are very serious discussions taking place as we speak among
cycling instructors.

Tantalizing! ;-)

They are discussing exactly that problem: What
are we to teach students about weird bike facilities, now that they're
popping up and grossly complicating traffic interactions?

How about situational awareness. Problem? You can't teach good
sense.

What if the
bike lane is in the door zone, and the cops are waiting to give tickets
for leaving that lane?

Absurd scenario. (Bring it on - I'll be there with bells on just for
the fun.)

What if the supposedly protected cycle track has
them riding downhill toward an intersection where they'll be hidden from
motorists until too late?

Situational awareness vs. blithe "doing as directed" and leave my
safety up to someone else.

What if the bike lane is to the right of the
right turn only lane, and motorists are getting hostile because they've
merged out of it to go straight?


Unreasonable hostility.

Yep, it's a problem. Of course, the "Any bike facility is a good bike
facility" crowd doesn't even recognize there is a problem. They think
as long as it's painted green (or is it blue?) it must be safe.

And here you are, defending their work.


You have completely contrived that position and ascribed it to me.